22 Feb
2017
22 Feb
'17
7:50 a.m.
On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Clem Cole <clemc(a)ccc.com> wrote:
On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 7:02 AM, Noel Chiappa <jnc(a)mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
wrote:
If I may, I think there was an additional thing at play: Linux was
essentially Unix.
Linux "won" because people wanted low-cost or free (as in gratis) Unix with
source that could run on modest commodity hardware, and Unix wasn't
available at a price point that was reasonable for most individuals
(certainly not with source). The people working on successor systems
weren't trying to reinvent Unix: they were working on new systems that
weren't Unix, but that's not what people wanted: Unix was good enough and
people were familiar and comfortable with it and that's what they wanted.
So Linux comes along and it's basically a "simplest possible solution"
Unix, freely available, runs on a PC, comes with source, and wasn't mired
in a lawsuit brought by a major US company. It was the right thing in the
right place at the right time.
I think there's a network effect that blinds a lot of folks to this
reality. Most of the folks on this list had access to Unix source and, with
no disrespect intended, it's easy to lose sight of what a big deal that
was. But unless you were in a position to already have access to it, it was
remarkably difficult to come by. Linux filled a gap that a lot of people
were looking to have filled.
- Dan C.
So there is a question here, though, and I'm
curious to see what others
who
were closer to the action think. Why _did_ Linux succeed, and not a Unix
derivative? (Is there any work which looks at this question? Some Linux
history? If not, there should be.)
I've thought and written a bit about this question a bit [
Would it be possible/advantageous to rewrite the Linux kernel in Rust when
the language is stable?
<https://www.quora.com/Would-it-be-possible-advantageous-to-rewrite-the-Linux-kernel-in-Rust-when-the-language-is-stable>
&
Why did Unix succeed and not Multics
<https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Unix-succeed-and-not-Multics> ]
and I'll not repeat all of here but
as one of the people that did switch from 386BSD to linux at the time,
the reason for me was purely because of the AT&T/BSDi case. You are
right, I wanted a "free" (i.e. very inexpensive) UNIX for the 386 and the
"big guns" were not going to give it. I thought we had it the 386 port
BSD which I had helped in a small way to create.
But I like, most hackers of the day, misunderstood incorrectly the case
to be about *trade secret *and the all based around the 1956 consent
decree, IBM vs AT&T; telephones and the computers. I was worried AT&T
would win because it was going to hard to cleaim that that the BSD code was
not a derivative work of the AT&T *copyright code base *(not
understanding the *trade secret* and the *copyright* difference
mattered).
So...I switched to Linux *not because I thought it was "better"* - in
fact, I b*tched (and still do) about many gratuitous differences, but as I
knew that we needed something for "consumer" HW (which was bring driven by
the WINTEL economics), and I was willing to use the "lessor" technology
(Linux) because it was "good enough" and gave me what I needed (UNIX on a
PC/386). I thought (incorrectly) somehow original Linux's European
authorship was going to protect me and my fellow hackers ever though it was
not as good as my beloved BSD system.
Simple put - using Christiansen's theories: Linux "won" because:
- it was "good enough",
- had a lot of people behind it that valued that was there and
invested in making it "better", and
- the economics of the platform (PC/386 - WINTEL etc) was on the
fastest grow curve [and its Christiansen's economic disruption was
displacing the Mini & Workstation].
BTW: at the time, I argued with the Roger Gourd and the OSF folks, that if
they released (sold) the OSF/1 RI uK which had not AT&T technology in it
(again thinking Copyright not Trade Secret); I was suggesting $100/copy
there was a market for it. I just could not get them interested.
Sun has done the RoadRunner and had their 386 port of Solaris; but again.
All the "UNIX" folks were still interested in pushing out "iron" so
were
blind to the WINTEL economic disruption.
Woulda, Coulda, Shoulda .... sigh